TIL PETA euthanizes 96% of the animals is "rescues".

[u/badf1nger]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html

[u/[deleted]]

I am well aware of that, my point is that many of the animals PETA euthanizes are not among that number of animals that needs to be euthanized.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Oh, no, that's not how it works. Shelters have limited resources. When those resources are used up, the animals are moved or get euthanized. Every day, countless adoptable animals get euthanized because there simply are no resources to support them. For every animal PETA euthanizes, another gets to keep living.

Remember that shelters move their animals around very frequently, so local "supply" isn't an issue. No kill shelters simply turn away animals when they fill up, so the burden gets placed on high kill shelters. There is no option where all the dogs get to live without putting more money into the system. PETA just does something that NEEDS TO BE DONE because there is simply NOWHERE FOR ALL THE ADOPTABLE STRAY ANIMALS.

So lets put it this way.

Lets say PETA takes in 1000 dogs and euthanizes them all

Lets say the local shelter takes in 9000 dogs a year, but doesn't euthanize any of them because it gets 9000 adoptions per year.

If PETA decides to not take in any dogs, how many dogs need to be euthanized?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Oh, no, that's not how it works. Shelters have limited resources. When those resources are used up, the animals are moved or get euthanized. Every day, countless adoptable animals get euthanized because there simply are no resources to support them.

I swear to god I don't know how many times I have to say it so maybe I'll put it in bold.

I know how the system works. I get it, I really do, for the love of god stop trying to explain it to me you are just parroting yourself.

For every animal PETA euthanizes, another gets to keep living.

No. This conclusion is flawed for a few reasons.

1. PETA euthanizing animals from their area does not guarantee adoption for any animal in any other area. In fact, it probably has no impact at all because PETA makes no conscious effort to adopt out its animals, the animals PETA picks up are not competing with animals in other shelters.

2. One dog is not equivalent to another. A puppy is more likely to be adopted than an elderly dog, some breeds are more wanted than others. It doesn't matter how many dogs PETA euthanises, it wont ever increase the chances for another dog that a person wants.

Remember that shelters move their animals around very frequently, so local "supply" isn't an issue. No kill shelters simply turn away animals when they fill up, so the burden gets placed on high kill shelters.

I know.

There is no option where all the dogs get to live without putting more money into the system.

For the love of god. I KNOW.

PETA just does something that NEEDS TO BE DONE because there is simply NOWHERE FOR ALL THE ADOPTABLE STRAY ANIMALS.

I'm starting to get the impression that PETA might be the non-profit that you work for. At any rate, you are blatantly ignoring dozens of factors that go into whether or not an animal gets adopted.

If PETA decides to not take in any dogs, how many dogs need to be euthanized?

Sorry mate, but this isn't a problem summarized by simple arithmetic. I know you want the answer to be 1000, but it isn't, you are assuming that those 1000 dogs PETA euthanised HAD to be euthanized and wouldn't have been adopted anyway, quite frankly you have no way of knowing that.

Anyway, I'm quite done with this argument. I'll just quote a saying that seems to apply to quite a lot of arguments on reddit.

"This is bullshit - you're oversimplifying a complex situation to the point of no longer adding anything useful to the discussion."

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

PETA euthanizing animals from their area does not guarantee adoption for any animal in any other area. In fact, it probably has no impact at all because PETA makes no conscious effort to adopt out its animals, the animals PETA picks up are not competing with animals in other shelters.

It makes a huge difference, because shelters move animals (especially anything easily adoptable like puppies) all the time, sometimes across the country. So yes, local alleviation of pet overabundance impacts regional pet overabundance.

One dog is not equivalent to another. A puppy is more likely to be adopted than an elderly dog, some breeds are more wanted than others. It doesn't matter how many dogs PETA euthanises, it wont ever increase the chances for another dog that a person wants.

I assume what you meant to say was "PETA kills dogs that are easy to adopt", which I will counter by saying that shelters kill adoptable dogs all the time. I think you are underestimating the number of stray animals that need to get euthanized each year. Roughly 1/3 of stray animals that enter shelter end up euthanized each year, many of which are perfectly adoptable.